John E. Gallus et al. v.
American Express Financial Corp. and American Express Financial Advisors Inc.
was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. The
plaintiffs allege that they are investors in several American Express mutual
funds and they purport to bring the action derivatively on behalf of those
funds under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The plaintiffs allege that fees
allegedly paid to the defendants by the funds for investment advisory and
administrative services are excessive. The plaintiffs seek remedies including
restitution and rescission of investment advisory and distribution agreements. The
plaintiffs voluntarily agreed to transfer this case to the United States
District Court for the District of Minnesota. In response to the Companys
motion to dismiss the complaint, the Court dismissed one of plaintiffs four
claims and granted plaintiffs limited discovery.

On December 1,
2005, the Company announced settlement of two SEC enforcement matters relating
to disclosure of certain revenue sharing programs and alleged market timing
practices during periods before the Distribution. Under the terms of the
settlements the Company is required to develop plans of distribution with the
assistance of an independent distribution consultant. Regarding revenue
sharing, the plan will address how such funds will be distributed to benefit
customers that purchased the particular mutual funds between January 1,
2001 through August 31, 2004. A second plan will address how funds will be
distributed to benefit investors in the Companys mutual funds for market-timing
activity that took place between January 1, 2002 and September 30,
2003. The distribution plans will be subject to final approval by the SEC. As part of
the settlements, the Company also agreed to certain undertakings regarding
disclosure, compliance and training.

During the course
of 2005 the Company reached settlements with four states in regulatory matters
regarding supervisory practices, financial advisor misappropriations of
customer funds, 529 plan and Class B mutual fund sales practices,
incentives for AEFAs branded financial advisors to sell both its proprietary
mutual funds and other companies mutual funds, the sale of proprietary mutual
fund products to financial planning clients, and the matters raised in the SEC
and NASD enforcement actions described above. As part of these state
settlements the Company agreed, in certain instances, to provide restitution
and to independent consultant review of certain of its practices and policies,
including certain of its sales and advice supervisory practices. One such
review was delivered in January 2006, and the Company has commenced
implementation of the recommended enhancements. The Company will continue to
meet its obligations under these settlements throughout 2006. There are pending
investigations and demands made by regulators of other states regarding matters
substantially similar to those which have settled, as well as the open matters
described above, and there can be no assurance that any one or more of these
investigations, demands and matters will settle or otherwise conclude without a
material adverse effect on the Companys consolidated results of operations,
financial condition or credit ratings.

John E. Gallus et al. v. American Express Financial Corp. and American
Express Financial Advisors Inc., was filed in the United States
District Court for the District of Arizona. The plaintiffs allege that they are
investors in several American Express mutual funds and they purport to bring
the action derivatively on behalf of those funds under the Investment Company
Act of 1940. The plaintiffs allege that fees allegedly paid to the defendants
by the funds for investment advisory and administrative services are excessive.
The plaintiffs seek remedies including restitution and rescission of investment
advisory and distribution agreements. The plaintiffs voluntarily agreed to transfer
this case to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. In
response to a motion to dismiss the complaint, the Court dismissed one of
plaintiffs four claims and granted plaintiffs limited discovery.

In October 2005, the Parent Company reached a
comprehensive settlement regarding the consolidated securities
class action lawsuit filed against the Parent Company, its former parent
and affiliates in October 2004 called 

John E. Gallus et al. v. American Express Financial Corp. and American
Express Financial Advisors Inc., was filed in the United States
District Court for the District of Arizona. The plaintiffs allege that they are
investors in several American Express mutual funds and they purport to bring
the action derivatively on behalf of those funds under the 1940 Act. The
plaintiffs allege that fees allegedly paid to the defendants by the funds for investment
advisory and administrative services are excessive. The plaintiffs seek
remedies including restitution and rescission of investment advisory and
distribution agreements. The plaintiffs voluntarily agreed to transfer this
case to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. In
response to the Companys motion to dismiss the complaint, the Court dismissed
one of plaintiffs four claims and granted plaintiffs limited discovery.

In October 2005, the Company reached a
comprehensive settlement regarding the consolidated securities class action
lawsuit filed against the Company, its former parent and affiliates in October 2004
called 